MIT Papers pertaining to steam powered automobiles

Hi all, I thought these might be of interest.

The main site

[dspace.mit.edu]


Title: Development of an analysis of a regenerative pump
Authors: Oelrich, John Albert
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: The investigation and selection of a Venturi mixing tube to obtain, with the minimum fuel pressure, the proper proportion of kerosene vapor and air for combustion in a Stanley Steam Car
Other Titles: Investigation and selection of a Venturi combining tube to provide the proper mixture of air and kerosene vapor for combustion in the Stanley Steam Car
Authors: Insley, Robert
McKenney, W. R
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: A study of the economy of locomotives
Other Titles: Study of the economy of locomotives of various types
Authors: Tao, Pao-Kai
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: Stationary tests of a white steam automobile
Authors: Fales, O. G
Norton, G. R
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: An investigation of the efficiency of the Stanley automobile engine and boiler with special reference to the use of superheated steam
Authors: Crowell, J. W
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: An oil burner for a steam automobile
Authors: Connor, R. H
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: The construction of an experimental apparatus for testing the power plant of the Stanley Steam automobile and some tests made with it
Other Titles: Tests of the Stumpf Uni-Flow engine as applied to the Stanley Steam automobile
Authors: Proctor, J. Worthen
[dspace.mit.edu]

Title: Development of a steam powered sports car
Authors: Fleischer, William B
Zafran, Sidney
[dspace.mit.edu]

Not sure if the direct links will work, if not just input the Authors in the search. I don't know if I found all of the papers pertaining to steam development or not, if you find more please place it's title, author and a link in another post.

Caleb Ramsby




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2008 06:32PM by Caleb Ramsby.

Hi Caleb:

I tried the links, hit a page with a search engine, so I entered 'STEAM'. I found that last topic about the sports car. Lets see if my direct links will work.

The first one is to a page that you can download the pdf file from a link.

[dspace.mit.edu]

The second hits the pdf directly

[dspace.mit.edu]


Ive tried to use the direct links in my postings here before have gotten good results. I open 'wordpad' and paste them in an open file then paste again from that to my post entry. since wordpad generally wont accept html its a good file to paste into. That way only the text is copy'd.

Jeremy

Hi Caleb:

Thanks for posting! I downloaded all the papers to memory stick, and have already had fun glancing through them.

Regards,

Ken

Hi all,

There are some very curious things in the White and Stanley tests. Both of which(the early ones) had the equipment provided by the respective companies and close cooperation.

One thing to note with the early Stanley test, 1904 by Crowell, is that he modified the superheater so as not to make as many passes through the boiler proper, so as to achieve a greater superheat temperature. This may or may not have been the origin of the later Stanleys superheater routing.

Note also the steam rates of the Stanley in the 1904 test, they are much lower than those that were published(sent in by Jim Crank, can't recall who conducted them however) in the bulletin(SACA) a while back. This even further indicates that the engine in the SACA printed test was leaking very badly. The Stanley used in the 1904 test was NEW. This also brings to question, would the steam rate have decreased in a few thousand miles as everything loosened up. Also they noted that when they tried to keep the water level in the boiler stable by by passing not all of or none of the feed water and only a little bit to keep a steady supply going into the boiler it modified the steam usage rates of the test, they did not specify as to how, but infered that it was negative.

Also note that during the White test they made one run with the throttle wide open to steady the effects of the fire coming on and going off effecting the boiler pressure and thusly the speed/power of the engine. During this run the boiler gave wet steam. Very interesting. With all of these cars at least in their 80's to 90's I don't think that there will ever be such vigorous tests of these antique machines again. Mabey someday one of the VRC replica cars will be given such a test, especially one with a Byran engine, but besides that. . .

Note that the test of the Stanley system using a Stumpf uni-flow engine does not seem to be complete, as to the aparatus, boiler size ect. However the steam rates are very close to those of the 1904 Stanley.

There are many curious things in these papers, especially seeing that the fuel and steam rates are overall with both systems, that is with the engine operating all of the pumps ect.

Caleb Ramsby



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2008 05:55PM by Caleb Ramsby.

Caleb
The early Stanley up through 1908 had the superheater leaving the throttle at the top of the boiler and splitting into two tubes and passing down through the boiler tubes under the crown sheet and back up through boiler tubes before going down to the engine.
This was done away with and the later cars the steam pipe came off the throttle down the outside of the boiler and back under the boiler over the fire through a coil (superheater)
Then up through a loop and back down to the engine. This loop keeps any carryover water in the superheater from going to the engine.
See attachment.

Rolly,

Thanks for the history. With there being four years between the tests and the change in design, I don't think that the test was the impetus for the change.

All the change in the test did was to decrease the number of tubes that passed the superheated steam through the boiler, they didn't give it an outside path such as the later change at the factory did.

All,

I am wondering if anyone else has ever heard of these tests before, until I found them I didn't even know they existed.

Note, one of the Stanley brothers was involved in the early Stanley test.

Caleb Ramsby

Caleb
When you first posted the site I read some of the stuff and remembered seeing this stuff before somewhere. I can’t remember. You have to remember at the turn of the century steam was big science.
Curtis designed the first big turbine and GE bought the patents, the first four vertical turbines were installed in the L-street power plant in Boston in 1904.
See attachment. They could now sale electricity for electric motors cheaper then small manufactures could run old mill engines for there factory’s.
See attachment.

Rolly,

Is that a giant TRIPLE espansion Corliss(hp vertical, intermediate and low pressure horizontal tandem) in the second Curtis turbine attachment? If so, was this what that plant used before the turbines were installed?

Do you know when they switched from vertical to horizontal turbines?

You are right on about steam being king around the turn of the Century, I found this out very definitively when looking for books and seeing that the best are from 1880 - 1920. It is rare to find a good book on steam published within the last 50 years or so, except for some on old time tech.

Great photos by the way, thanks again.

Caleb Ramsby

Is that a giant TRIPLE expansion Corliss(hp vertical, intermediate and low pressure horizontal tandem) in the second Curtis turbine attachment? If so, was this what that plant used before the turbines were installed?

No that is a condensate pump for the turbine. I have attached a photo of the big triples, there were seven of these in the Boston area before the turbines. I think it was around 1915 that the first horizontal turbines were installed in the Boston area. That is about the time Abner Doble was going to MIT or just leaving school.

Rolly,

Ok, that makes a lot more sense. The piping didn't look nearly large enough for steam and the routing didn't look right either.

Attached is my favorite steam engine of all time. Not just because it is gorgeous, but for the story of it's very rapid creation for the centennial exposition held in Philadelphia in 1876. Just thinking of it operating all of those machines through shafting is something else. Engines like this were recent history when the Stanleys and all of the others were getting into things.

Caleb Ramsby



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2008 09:09PM by Caleb Ramsby.

Yes I have that photo somewhere. We have a nice Corliss horizontal 16 X 36 in operation at the wireless and steam museum, but one of the first steam cars was 1867 almost ten years earlier see attachment.

Rolly,


I never heard of the Taylor before, the Dudgeon from 1855 yeah, along with Cugnot, Trevethick and Hancock amoung others. Although one could argue that the late 1700's into early 1800's road steam powered vehicles in England were not cars per say, but they ran on fire and went down the road. Not to mention that monks little steam turbine job from around the 1500's, which may or may not have existed and or worked(I like to think that it both existed and worked).

I haven't seen much information about Canada's early cars, do you know of a good book that I should look up?

Not to get too far off subject, but do you know if there is much of a problem with wear on the valve catch's on the Corliss. I have always loved that click clack of the catch and release they have, along with the twisting plate.

About the twisting plate, the valve actuation on the condensate pump is what made me think that it was a Corliss. Those are mechanically actuated valves for the condensate pump, right?

Thanks again,

Caleb Ramsby

I have always loved that click clack of the catch and release they have,

In Rhode Island they have a Greene engine 17 X 36 This engine has Grate type valves on the intake and Rotary D type valves on the exhaust.
[www.newsm.org]

See an animated image.
<Animated image of the Greene Valves>

About the twisting plate, the valve actuation on the condensate pump is what made me think that it was a Corliss. Those are mechanically actuated valves for the condensate pump, right?
Yes.

A lot of these engines have a rotary slide valve. They’re not a piston valve. They are just a slide valve in a cylindrical shape. They wear in like any slide valve.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2008 06:39AM by Rolly.

I bring notice to;

Title: The construction of an experimental apparatus for testing the power plant of the Stanley Steam automobile and some tests made with it
Other Titles: Tests of the Stumpf Uni-Flow engine as applied to the Stanley Steam automobile
Authors: Proctor, J. Worthen

Am I being stupid or does this mean these tests were conducted on a Stanley fitted with a Stumpf Unaflow engine?
Amongst the Stumpf drawings is a 1920 5x4 automotive engine similar in layout to the Doble uniflow, just wondering if this was the unit tested?

Brian



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2008 08:19AM by Brian McMorran.

Rolly,

Wow, what a great engine! I can't believe that I havn't heard of the Greene engine before. All of the technical books I have usually only represent the Corliss with it's catch and release valve actuation.

There is another type of grid iron with a riding variable cutoff. It uses bell cranks to change the direction of the eccentric rod and to greatly reduce the motion of the valve(s) when they are closed. However the Greene and Corliss do that much better.

The Greene catch and release system seems to be more simple to setup and machine than the corliss "curved hook" catch and release. Interesting to note that they both use a dashpot to return the valves.

I seem to recall a more direct actuation of the rotating valves(curved slide as you said) with a "riding" cut off valve inside of the main valve(tube inside a tube), however this may just be my imagination effecting my memory again.

My question about wear was for the catch and release hooks, I was thinking that as they wore it would change when the valves were released but with the slow speed of these engines I don't know if that is an issue or not. The Greene looks like it is very adjustable to take up any wear.

Really neat.

Brian,

The test of the Stanley with the Stumpf was in 1917, I don't know when they started making small engines(Stumpf). There seems to be some of the thesis missing, I don't know if it wasn't completed, if it is lost or just not scaned.

The preamble to the test says that they will describe the testing aparatus and equipment and then it just has the test results. The results don't seem much better if at all than a standard Stanley engine.

I don't know what they used.

Caleb Ramsby

Caleb

Thanks for the files. This brought back a lot of memories of cranking out my own bachelor's thesis. I even knew one of the advisers on the pump paper. Heck of a note: MIT has this thesis from 1917, but they lost mine from 1974.

The Henry Ford Museum has a Corliss engine from the 1850's they run daily. Unfortunately since they had a fatality a while back they do not use steam anymore, running the exhibits on compressed air. It only runs about a quarter of the old speed, but it's still quite impressive.

Tom

I also love the Ford Museums inline triple expansion Allison, but they run that on an electric motor, darn it. They have so many of their old exhibits either in storage or deaccessioned that it hardly seems like the same place any more.

Ken

When I was 9 or so my family visited the Smithsonian Institution complex. While there amoungst many other things I saw the Stanley engine from the beach racer(which ever year of engine got there 1906 or 1907, ect.). I remember it was a very odd display, with the engine in the fore ground and pictures of the racer and various other Stanleys. The thought that I remember the most was, "Where is the rest of the engine?". I was used to seeing big I.C. engines apart and there seemed to be a lot of it missing. I mentioned this to an old guy who was standing there looking at the engine and he just gave a little smile and said, "That's all there is to the engine, now the boiler, that's a different story.".

I completely forgot that steam cars existed until 2002 or so when I stumbled upon this Woodsens site when researching Wankel's engines. Then, well, steam is addictive let's just say that.

Ben Franklin said that, "Beer is proof that God wants us to be happy."

I think that, "Steam is proof that God wants us to be obsessive."

Caleb Ramsby

I couldn't agree more, Caleb. Steam is definitely an obsession, weather in the field of modern steam engines, older and antique cars, tractors or a steam calliope. It is a fine balance between engineering principles, craftsmanship and art.

From the romance of the thundering old steam trains, the engineering brilliance of the Doble and the White, the reliability of the Stanley, the steam powered airplane of Besler, to the dream of doing the salt at 200 MPH, it's got ya.

Best, ---- Bill G.

Hi Caleb & Bill,

Steam is definitely addictive!

I just figured out a simple way to mechanically lift one of the slide valves to vent valve chest/steam line pressure for close-quarters maneuvering, as in parallel parking, backing up, pulling into a tight garage or parking space, etc.. Lifter is linked to throttle lever for handy control, and can even be operated with engine running -- valve can slide freely on the lifter. No separate 700°F relief valve or plumbing, and it looks like an easy build. I also figured out a real knucklehead-simple automatic control for the valve chest drain cock. When it comes to K.I.S.S., the last "S" is me. LOL. Can't let Ken monopolize the self-deprecating humor here.

A couple excerpts from the May, 1918 issue of "The Journal of the Society of Automotive Engineers"; pp 13-18 an article by John Sturgess of the Stanley Motor Carriage Company:

"A stock [Stanley] engine under test-block run has frequently operated with a steam consumption of 16 to 17 lb. per hp-hr., a remarkable result from so small an engine."

...

"As the engine is a relatively minor problem in steam cars -- owing to steam engine practice being so highly standardized -- differences in type or details of construction are not of such pronounced moment as the major problems of burner and boiler. Another company (now among the gas-car manufacturers) [White?] for a few years used a compound engine. The unaflow type has been proposed and much discused recently. We conducted tests on a unaflow engine a year ago and failed to discover any superior steam economy. We did encounter many minor disadvantages in this type when applied to automobiles, among which were uncertainty at times as to whether the car would run forward or backward on starting, and the possibility that it would not start at all. Furthermore, its high compression was a disadvantage and its weight and size exceeded that of the contraflow type.

"These difficulties could be overcome in considerable measure, but so doing would modify the unaflow type to the point that its characteristic feature would be largely lost, and there would be added complications in construction.

"The use of high superheat, moreover, largely minimizes the benefit of the unaflow cycle, and the absence of vacuum further defeats its primary advantage."

=============

I had always thought that the unaflow engine they tested was a Doble-Detroit, based on the reported problems, but considering the articles Caleb points out, maybe it was a different engine entirely?

Peter

Hi,

Don't forget that we need steam powered turn signals too. Nothing like a few blasts of steam to clear the path for a lane change. Also a steam powered sub-wolfer system for the younger crowd. The heck with so many Watts of sound, were talkin Horsepower.

Interested in the valve chest drain cock idea. I hadn't thought of one for my engine.

I haven't gone through it yet, but the paper on the steam sports car had some good figuring in it on heat exchangers that looked like it would fit in with the Kays and London book. I was, of course, interested in the parts about condensers. I am getting close to another test on a condenser core design and have tracked down some good papers on automotive radiator heat properties. When I get good, verifiable condenser core results I can now calculate the best balance in size between the radiators and the condenser.

Best, ------- Bill G.

Hi Bill,

Good deal, some radiator-on-truck tests should be able to nail this down. Maintain actual vacuum on the engine exhaust, and there goes one of the objections to unaflows in cars.

I put the valve chest drain valve under the front hood, connected to bottom of valve chest via 3/16" steel tube with a pigtail coil in it for flex. Just upline from the valve is an expansion tube with step-up lever. When you set the parking brake, a cable/linkage opens the valve chest drain. When you release the brake lever to get going, a catch holds the valve lever & drain valve open, and steam/water start blowing thru the expansion tube and valve while underway (or idling). When expansion tube hits about 220F (slight superheat), the chest and drain tube have only dry steam, and the tube expands, moves step-up lever, and releases the catch via linkage. Spring-loaded drain valve then snaps shut until the next parking brake lever pull. Drain valve is plumbed to feedwater heater, so no steam blowing around the landscape during warmup. Something like this could probably be installed in any steam car. Thermo switch and solenoid valve if one prefers. Digital control looks doubtful in this instance.

Nice thing is, you can use a cheap, easily-sourced 450°F rated (ptfe sealed) ball valve instead of something for 700°F or higher steam. The expansion tube closes the (isolated) valve long before the steam going through hits valve-toasting temperature.

For a proper unaflow, condensate in steam chest, etc should just blow through the cylinder wall exhaust ports along with the exhaust steam during warmup. However a drain would be good if chest is shaped such that it can trap water & eat all the superheat during a long warmup period. That can be avoided with proper steam chest & inlet valve design. Having said that, note that my design has the drain valve. LOL.

One important "duh" discovery ("duhscovery"?) which I made recently is that engines warm up much faster under load, than when idling. Expander mass to heat flow ratio, and its effect on warmup time & efficiency during warmup, is a serious issue in automobiles. Real-world driving often includes short trips and usually lots of very low load running and idling/standby. Often the engine never fully warms up before it is turned off at the end of a run. It's a serious (and virtually always ignored) efficiency killer for IC cars, and most of the reason for gas/electric hybrids. Also an issue for steam cars. I think this explains most of the similarity in actual vehicle fuel mileage between advanced engines which kick butt on the test bench and "primitive crummy" engines which eat several times as much fuel on the test bench. I think I found a way around this low-load/warmup problem -- a steam powerplant with diesel-beating efficiency -- and it's not a hybrid -- but it's more R&D time than I want to put into my first build (car) project.

Getting back to fun, at one time I actually considered gasoline mantle lamps for headlights & turn signals (with mechanical shutters). Alas, in this case the electrical equivalent is just too cheap, easily available, reliable, and simple, in comparison. Same with electric wipers, guess the steam wipers will have to wait. Still considering a steam whistle instead of electric horn, though. Yes, it is loud enough. LOL But an oogah horn would be fun. And that's what it's all about.

Peter

Peter, I like the look of it. I want everything as non electric as possible and certainly non computerized. This, even though the boiler will produce the electricity. The car should be able to at least run without electrics, even though better with.

My steamchests are not as big as I would like them for good cylinder filling, but the reverse pulse from the valve closing ends at the steamchest and would not back into the steam line. This means that steam flow into the steamchest should be fairly constant and ram up the pressure between valve inlet openings. Any small water slugs should get pulverized in the steamchest. I guess I will have to build the thing to see if condensation in the steamchest will be a problem.

A common IC engine looses about 12 1/2% efficiency from running cold. This when it is already into about 12 -15 % efficiency just from city driving way off it's efficiency curve. Full throttle, mid RPM range is best for IC efficiency.

With the steam engine well insulated, it should warm up quickly. I am thinking of warming coils in the crankbox anyway and the same saturated steam that cools the cylinder walls heats them to temperature. (550 -650 degrees.) Crankbox at 220.

More work on the condenser core today.

Best Regards, ----- Bill G.

Thanks for the informative and insightful article in the Bulletin Caleb. I have been looking for push-back on it but it looks like you got off easy. Either that or you made your case too well!

Roger

Hi Roger,

I suspect that Caleb Ramsby did indeed "make his case too well" in his article in the latest Steam Automobile Bulletin. It is difficult to "push back" against REALITY. My miscellaneous disagreements aside, IMO, Caleb's "What The Stanleys Got Right, Or, A Plea For Sensible Steam" is the most important article to appear in "The Steam Automobile Bulletin" in many years. Maybe the most important ever. Anyone with a serious interest in future steam-powered road vehicles should read it, and carefully consider its many points.

Personally, I am working to test, document, and hopefully demonstrate many of the well-known and long-known points which Caleb made in his article -- through extended real-world road driving, rather than through theoretical internet debates or brief test-bench or race-track publicity stunts.

Peter
[www.angelfire.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/26/2012 08:41AM by Peter Brow.

November 26, 2012 As a person who has tried to make steam things run I am an authority in my own mind on the subject and singularly unsuccessful in the results. It is the job of the steam club to encourage all types of development. It is also our job to entertain all types of opinions. There are two countervailing experiences in the steam world; the first is that old fashioned lower pressure steam is easy to work with and things move when it is used, and the second is that the future of steam is with thermal efficiency approaching that of the competition. We can work around things a bit when cheaper fuel is available. The electric battery people are able to claim great mileage when, in fact, they are using cheap coal-fired electrical generating plants to make energy at one-fifth the cost of a gasoline powered IC engine. The steam world should be able to be equally dishonest when comparing costs to mileage. With that aside aside I suggest that what we have learned over the years is that modern efficient steam is expensive to develop. It is not easy for someone to develop something practical in their garage and in their lifetime and with whatever money they can hide from the wife. Therefore there is not a right and wrong answer. My life will be much easier if we can discuss our opinions without taking them personally. We, established steam people, are going to be in great demand as more and more people get interested in steam as a solution to the world's problems. I suggest a look at the HydroICE people out of Missouri who have come up with what can be best and most charitably described as a very original idea, and certainly one that we would not have thought of. Whatever you say the engine will not leak steam into the crankcase nor will it want for lubrication. Tom Kimmel

Hey Roger,

I tried to post on here a few weeks back but the site shut down as I was writing the reply.

Thanks for the compliment on the article. I have enjoyed reading about your progress with the Tragster, which is very curious to me in its combination of old school solid fuel and new school sparky control system.

Tom and Peter,

Glad to see that the article may be getting a few people thinking.

At the very least I hope that it inspires people to do a good bit of their own research into the all and not just tow either the "modern" or "old school" rope.

Caleb Ramsby

Hi Guys,

I'm sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I've contributed to the forum for some time - albeit with a bit of a gap! I only joined SACA recently. I'm from overseas, & have only signed up to receive the Bulletin by email. Can anyone tell me ... does it arrive as an attachment, or do I have to seek it out somewhere? When was the last one sent?

Greg

Hi Greg,

Send Karl Petersen a PM to find out how it is being handled, I am out of the loop on this.

Best,
Scott

All files from this thread

File Name	File Size		Posted by	Date
Steam and Oiling System.JPG	68.8 KB	open | download	Rolly	05/30/2008	Read message
Curtis turbine-2.JPG	73.2 KB	open | download	Rolly	05/30/2008	Read message
Curtis turbine.JPG	92 KB	open | download	Rolly	05/30/2008	Read message
Triple.JPG	108 KB	open | download	Rolly	05/30/2008	Read message
corliss.jpg	70.3 KB	open | download	Caleb Ramsby	05/30/2008	Read message
Taylor\'s Buggy 1867.jpg	122.6 KB	open | download	Rolly	05/30/2008	Read message
st4.jpg	45.3 KB	open | download	Brian McMorran	05/31/2008	Read message